WELCOME TO THE OFFICIAL RICHARD E GERSTEIN JUSTICE BUILDING BLOG. THIS BLOG IS DEDICATED TO JUSTICE BUILDING RUMOR, HUMOR, AND A DISCUSSION ABOUT AND BETWEEN THE JUDGES, LAWYERS AND THE DEDICATED SUPPORT STAFF, CLERKS, COURT REPORTERS, AND CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS WHO LABOR IN THE WORLD OF MIAMI'S CRIMINAL JUSTICE. POST YOUR COMMENTS, OR SEND RUMPOLE A PRIVATE EMAIL AT HOWARDROARK21@GMAIL.COM

Wednesday, February 21, 2007

PARKING II

Yesterday was an unmitigated disaster- parking wise. When court is closed Monday, the double dose of people flooding into our building on Tuesday causes complete havoc. It is just not fair to tell someone they must appear in court, and then not have any parking spaces for them. Something must be done. The only short term solution we think can be immediately implemented is to plan for these "Terrible Tuesdays" and have the clerk re-schedule some of the arraignments and other miscellaneous hearings over the course of the following week. ==============The comments on the blog yesterday were very wide ranging and very good. There was a top ten circuit judge list, which we were waiting for some enterprising attorney to write. There were some historical discussions on presidents, and there were several critiques on Judge Seidlin in Broward and his handling of the Anna Nicole Smith circus. There was one disturbing comment about a local judge who refused to allow an attorney to use the restroom until voire dire was completed. We think anyone with real knowledge of the incident should post it in the comments section.======================The Monday Editorial page of the NY Times contained a short blurb on The Bush Administration putting a small amendment into the large defense appropriation bill which has the effect of suspending the PosseeComitatus law. Once again, with little notice, and no fan-fare, this administration-in the name of fear, has expanded the power of the federal government. As our Constitutional Law Professor used to say when a student agreed with an over-reaching use of federal power- "what are you going to do when they come for you?"From the NY Times Editorial on Monday:The provision, signed into law in October, weakens two obscure but important bulwarks of liberty. One is the doctrine that bars military forces, including a federalized National Guard, from engaging in law enforcement. Called posse comitatus, it was enshrined in law after the Civil War to preserve the line between civil government and the military. The other is the Insurrection Act of 1807, which provides the major exemptions to posse comitatus. It essentially limits a president’s use of the military in law enforcement to putting down lawlessness, insurrection and rebellion, where a state is violating federal law or depriving people of constitutional rights.The newly enacted provisions upset this careful balance. They shift the focus from making sure that federal laws are enforced to restoring public order. Beyond cases of actual insurrection, the president may now use military troops as a domestic police force in response to a natural disaster, a disease outbreak, terrorist attackor to any “other condition.”Just who among us is comfortable with George Bush or Dick Cheney deciding what "any other condition" means?When some armed solider from Nebraska asks you for ID before you can drive down your street in the future, just don't say we didn't warn you.

35 comments:

FAKE JUDGE JUDY
said...

Rumpole - What is your prediction on the Anna Nicole Smith ruling? Will this Judge Seidlin get his TV show that he has been so badly wanting? Does he have the judicial power to decide the paternity issue and order a dna sample from howard stern (not sirius 100!) and potentially order the baby returned to the real father in california? The televised hearing is sensational television...

The suspension of posse comitatus doesn't concern me at all. We won't see the military in our cities. Even if W wanted too. We don't have the budget for it. I would, however, like to see much better protection of our borders. The military is well suited for that in my opinion.

Regardless, we sure as hell needed them after hurricane Andrew and NO needed them after Katrina. The local police forces simply cannot handle disasters of that level, particularly since many of them are victimized during those types of crisis and need to take care of their families (just like the rest of us).

There still are checks and balances: public opinion (ie. votes) and short terms of office (4 years......God only knows that the President can't get much done except in years 1.5-3), Congress, the federal courts, etc.

I don't know about the situation around the rest of the courthouse but parking in the monthly lot since the recent spate of tv reporters is absurd. Why do they get the choice spots? Are they reimbursing the city? Or are we subsidizing them as well. Shoudn't they have to pay like the rest of us? They all go off of one feed anyway. It's not fair...wah...wah...wah!!!!!!

Has anyone read the School scandal on the front page of Metro News today ? Wht kind of background did they do on this Constanzo security consultant ? Well, if you look him up on the civil/criminal dockets you will see has been arrested for 2 cts of battery, 1 ct of stalking and 1 ct of culpable negligence. He also has a restraining order against him and his own father Sarino Costanzo was recently disbarred... Great Security consultant, maybe thats why the School Board is a mess......I dont believe his story for anything.....

To the 3:13, 2/20 poster who was offended by the use of a certain word: I am sorry if I offended you in anyway. However, you did note that it was used in a historical context. Further, as judges and lawyers we seek exactitude in our courtrooms. We ask witnesses for the exact words, as best as possible. We do not ask witnesses to paraphrase and delete offensive material. The phrase was an exact quote of an epithet hurled at TR for his principled stance on civil rights. If you are in doubt, look it up in Edmund Morris’ excellent second volume of his Pulitzer Prize winning biography of Teddy Roosevelt, Theodore Rex. The aforementioned word is a hateful word and I find it absolutely abhorrent. However, as I believe Alex de Toucqville (Sic.?) said (If I am wrong, I’m sure Rumpole will correct me), “those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it.” The acknowledgement of the hateful venom contained in said pejorative should serve to remind us to do our best to avoid the horrors of the past. Please, do not equate my factual statement with its use in rap and/or hip hop music. Finally, what are you doing listening to that for, anyway? Your acceptance of such “music” and its gratuitous use of the word you, and all fair minded human beings should find offensive, does far more to promote its hateful use that my factual statement. As such, I am offended that you financially endorse its use by buying the offensive product.While on the topic of music: Rumpole, the con law professor you quoted in today’s post must be a fan of The Clash. One last word on TR’s civil rights record: he was the first president to ever invite a black man to dinner at the White House. After Booker T. Washington dined with the president, a southern newspaper editorialized TR’s actions as “the most damnable outrage which has ever been perpetrated by a citizen of the United States.” So…let’s be damnably outrageous!

former judge here:i was always impressed with how smart judge rob pineiro is. he is a true renaissance man and we are all collectively privileged to have him making life or death decisions. rob, you and i started at about the same time and i am proud of you and respect you (and think the world of diana!).

Rump, I've been thinking a lot about you lately. I know who you are and its shocking that no one else has caught on...nevertheless, here are some clues for those still in the dark:

1. its a "he" (sorry, I didn't know how else to put it)2. he's a really nice guy to talk to when you've darted out of Perez's division 7 times and the line has still not gotten shorter.3.strike up a conversation about our current state of affairs, whether political or judicial and he will give you a very middle-of-the-road, fair-minded and balanced opinion about what to do to resolve it that acutally sounds reasonble.4. it is NOT Phil R. leave the guy alone, he doesn't have the time or the patience to deal with all this crap.5. he is INTIMATELY familiar with the rules of traffic court6. he's tried a murder or 2, maybe even death.7. he DOES NOT dye his hair and you can see his 40-50 years are a' showin ( as they do on his whiskers)8. you rarely, if ever, see him at au bon pon.9. lastly, he's quick to give an uncomfortable but warm chuckle.10. Rump, I've got your back!

Rumpole, how about a post to the memory of Judge Baxter. Some people have criticized his courtroom manners, but those of us who worked closely with him knew that his antics were just an act and that he was a caring judge who knew the law well and applied it with a lot of compassion.

Since I think you want your blog to remain relevant and meaningful, I am responding to the post from yesterday about the 'top ten circuit judges'. It seems to me that it needs a definitition. Here are my thoughts:

A good circuit judge is: 1) one that is polite and respectful: when a prosecutor says they need to call their DC/office/supervisor/witness-coordinator, that request is granted; when a defense attorney says they need to call their office/witnesses/training attorney (for pds)/client, that request is granted; when clerks/court reporters/anyone needs a court comfort break, that request is granted; 2)one that is prepared and conscientious; 3)one that reads submitted motions and caselaw BEFORE the hearing, [this becomes interesting for those among us that file unsupported/simple motions listing no caselaw or facts, versus those among us (often federal practicioners) that file motions and attach caselaw we expect a judge to read. Does it qualify on this blog to make a judge 'mean and/or bad', when they require more? Or is the judge lifting the level of our practice by requiring more, thus thought of to be demanding?]; 4)one that has a JA and staff that treats attorneys and litigants respectfully, and sets our emergency motions on an already over-booked calendar; 5)one that is considerate/accomodating of others' schedules, [think afternoon hearings: Wednesday, Thursday and yes, Virginia, even Friday special sets]; 6) one whose office might call after you said you would be late/unavailable for court, to inform you the judge granted your unopposed motion or granted your continuance, to alleviate the need for you to come to court; 7) one who listens to the prosecution when they explian difficulties with the victim's schedule/life/travel; 8) one who denies/grants continuances based on the case, number of previous continuances, amount of preperation necessary and fairness to all parties. If this blog is to remain relevant, then we all (prosecutors/pds/privates) need to admit that a 'good' judge is not merely one who rules in our favor, and can be branded State or Defense oriented. How about a judge that actually says: 'good morning' to lawyers, witnesses in court, and defendants at the podium or in the box? Rump, don't you think all this matters? Don't we want judges to 'see' a case for what it is worth by refusing to undercut a plea offer, or to offer a YO sentence or to undercut a plea when appropriate? We should be honest with ourselves: in a case where the State can't 'locate' a victim on the third/fourth reset, do we think a 'good' judge should grant that continuance without good cause? On a case where a defendant has missed or been late or failed to appear one, two or more times, does it make a judge 'bad', to take them into custody (especially after warning)? There are extremes at both ends of the spectrum. Shouldn't we really judge our judges by their ability to straddle those extremes fairly?

To Judge Pinero- we obviously read some of the same books. I personally think Morris's first volume on TR was better than his second. I didn't realize he won the Pulitizer for the second volume as well. TR's humanity, which you correctly identified in his support for african-americans and his intolerance of racism, is one of the reasons I rated him so highly. I do not in any way believe your earlier post was offensive. It is clear to me that you admire President Roosevelt for his courageous stand in support of black amercians and his decision to be the first president to dine with an african american male at the White House.

All that being said, how could Morris do such a good job on TR and completely blow the Reagan biography? The Reagans were so impressed with Morris's first volume on TR they gave him amazing access to the President. And yet Morris blew the chance he had with a very poorly written book.

poster 8:02 did an outstanding job of listing some criteria for good circuit court judges. while we have an adversary system, we can all achieve success by being advocates for our clients (whether it be the citizens of our state or our individual client); while at the same time being honest, ethical, fair, and reasonable.

Most of the judges listed meet that criteria and I have great respect for them.

Advocate well, be honest, be prepared, be professional, and lets set an example to the world that in the crazy business of dade criminal court, we are professional.

Hi Rumpole - Don't you think that this would be the way to go in the Anna Nicole Smith case?

Since both Howard K. Stern and Larry Birkhead are both in court and have been drinking glasses and glasses of water while testifying, the adverse attorneys could take the cup and have it dna tested to prove paternity. If the police are not taking this route, it is legal in the civil paternity action.

Rumpole,Thank-you for your understanding. You are quite correct, the first volume won the Pulitzer and is much better than the second. I simply regard the two as the one biography.As to the Reagan volume--Morris dabbled in his literary fiction of having a relationship with Reagan. He went far afield from sticking to the facts as regard TR.TR was responsible for many fine accomplishments, but, none so memorable as providing the inspiration for one of our more beloved childhood icons--the Teddy Bear. The cuddly toy was created in honor of TR having spared a bear during one of his hunting trips. The bear had been caught and tied up and it would not have been "sporting" to pot him.

yup, read the School Board story.....much more behind it than meets the eye...maybe he should investigate Anna Nicole, her prior habits and Howard Stern since he seems so seasoned lol. Maybe he can piss of someone there also.